• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Dinosaur footprints destroy flood geology.

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,333
52,693
Guam
✟5,169,355.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
ChordatesLegacy said:
To believe in creationism is to close one’s mind to the real story of evolution.
Click to expand...
You're not a creationist? And what does creationism have to do with evolution?
 
Upvote 0

ChordatesLegacy

Senior Member
Jun 21, 2007
1,896
133
65
✟25,261.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
AV1611VET said:
You're not a creationist? And what does creationism have to do with evolution?
Click to expand...

They have everything to do with each other.

Creationism is the magical mystical view of the history of life.

Evolution is the scientific facts of the history of life.

So you see they are different sides of the same coin.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,333
52,693
Guam
✟5,169,355.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
MrGoodBytes said:
Both, since most YECs deny the history of life as described by science and substitute their own version.
Click to expand...
Which version came first - (who's denying who)?
 
Upvote 0
T

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
ChordatesLegacy said:
Well good point, but I have never been able to nail creationists down on facts, they prefer a fluid approach to their view, that way they can move the goal posts.
Click to expand...

True dat.

Creationism actually, by its nature involves "Special Creation". So the act of "Creation" meant life was literally popping into existence over a range of time. So Creationists have difficulty understanding that for evolution, the "origins" of life aren't as important to the science, since evolution deals with "change in that life over time", leaving the "origins" to some other aspect of chemistry.

I think that's why Creationists can't discuss evolution without reference to "origins" (that would require they understand the other sides' point, which as you've seen, isn't their strong suit), but further it requires that "creation" not be a single event.

God created all these different creatures because he was unable to figure out a system by which one life form could change into another. Thankfully biologists discovered genetic drift and mutation coupled with natural selection. Maybe God could try that approach on the next universe he creates.

I liken it to the question: "Which is better? A clock that you have to constantly move the hands manually to tell you the correct time, or a clock that runs once wound up?"

Clearly creationists would prefer the clock that you have to constantly manually move the hands for. At least that appears to be their conception of God.

Theistic Evolutionists at least have a bit more of an interesting conception of God-as-adult.
 
Upvote 0
T

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
MrGoodBytes said:
Naturally, the YEC version came first.
Click to expand...

As did geocentrism, as did the theory of "humours" in medicine, as did "spontaneous generation" in biology, as did "phlogiston", as did...

So YEC's should be applauded as being the only theory developed by ancients based on no data that is absolutely perfectly true 100% without question ever ever ever.

It's just that good!
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,333
52,693
Guam
✟5,169,355.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
thaumaturgy said:
As did geocentrism, as did the theory of "humours" in medicine, as did "spontaneous generation" in biology, as did "phlogiston", as did...
Click to expand...
All taught to students by the scientists of their day.
 
Upvote 0

MrGoodBytes

Seeker for life, probably
Mar 4, 2006
5,868
286
✟30,272.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Single
AV1611VET said:
All taught to students by the scientists of their day.
Click to expand...
Indeed, and all so thoroughly debunked and discredited by scientists later on that nobody will ever repeat these errors. On the other side, we have religion in general and Christianity in particular, where every imaginable denomination, heresy, sect or school of thought has its adherents because there is no way of distinguishing between true and false in theology.
 
Reactions: thaumaturgy
Upvote 0
T

thaumaturgy

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2006
7,541
882
✟12,333.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
AV1611VET said:
All taught to students by the scientists of their day.
Click to expand...

Indeed, and all, ultimately, proven wrong by science. Let's see how robust "Creationism" is. Care to "prove" creationism using something other than a fun time "unfalsifiable" word-game like your Apple Challenge?

You see, AV, science grows and learns, religion pretty much has a vested interest in "not learning" because to learn for the religious is to realize that they may not have "ultimate truth", which, obviously, calls into question their God.

Maybe there is a god, who knows? I see so many people with so many different ideas of what God is or isn't or what God would do or not do, or what he likes or dislikes, that I simply have to wonder; who's teaching whom what in religion?

And how will religion ever grow and mature so long as there's no way to "test" God.

But you go ahead and mock the single strength of science. Make some "point" about science's limitations. It only reveals to us religion's limitations.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,333
52,693
Guam
✟5,169,355.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Split Rock said:
Yes, but the more important questions are, did they teach that Pluto was a planet, and that pregnant mothers should take thaldiomide?
Click to expand...
No --- that would have been extremely-advanced science to them. They would have to wait until they got the "proper equipment" to determine those.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,333
52,693
Guam
✟5,169,355.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
thaumaturgy said:
I see so many people with so many different ideas of what God is or isn't or what God would do or not do, or what he likes or dislikes, that I simply have to wonder; who's teaching whom what in religion?
Click to expand...
And science is unanimous?
 
Upvote 0
N

Nathan Poe

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2002
32,198
1,693
51
United States
✟41,319.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
AV1611VET said:
The HISTORY of life, or the BEGINNING of life?
Click to expand...

Both, AV -- surely you know that by now.

By espousing a specific BEGINNING of life, you must necessarily have a certain HISTORY that flows from it -- one that necessarily needs to be shoehorned into a 6,100 year time frame.

So Creationists need to concoct such gibberish as "Embedded Age," "The Global Flood" with "Water Vapor Canopies," and "hyper-macroevolution" in order to attempt to fit it all together.

Meaning, that Creationism does indeed deal with -- that is to say, shamlessly mutilate -- the HISTORY of life.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

What Do You Say When Kids Ask About Dinosaurs?
Replies
1
Views
308
One Bread, One Body - Catholic
Hoping2
H
That's one small step for [a] dinosaur...
Replies
15
Views
916
Physical & Life Sciences
Lost4words
Dinosaurs
Replies
12
Views
1K
Exposition & Bible Study
timf
T
  • Locked
  • Poll
Do you trust God or Man when it comes to the creation?
Replies
517
Views
20K
Creation & Theistic Evolution
HARK!
  • Locked
Flood Geology
Replies
403
Views
21K
Creation & Evolution
FreeinChrist
Menu
Log in
Register